When the American Cancer Society last year paid to air television ads warning of the dangers of secondhand smoke, it didnt disclose the expenditure because, it contended, the ads werent supporting a proposed smoking ban working its way through the Legislature.

The states Public Disclosure Commission disagreed and the society eventually reported the money it spent on the ads.

But that wasnt enough for the commission, which Thursday approved a $3,500 fine against the society for missing deadlines to report the money it spent on the ads and other so-called grass-roots lobbying intended to generate support for smoking ban proposals.

According to a report from the commissions staff, the violations are significant, since the $64,200 the commission spent pushing the smoking ban wasnt disclosed until after the 2004 legislative session ended. That means people watching the ads  some of which featured former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop urging them to ask their legislators to support the ban  didnt know who was paying for them.

The smoking ban proposals, which would have prohibited smoking in bars, restaurants and most other non-tribal businesses, failed. An initiative that would have done the same thing failed to make the ballot last year, though a similar one this year appears more likely to make the Nov. 8 ballot, thanks in part to nearly $600,000 in backing from the Cancer Society.

But the society has also missed deadlines for reporting its contributions to the initiative this year, according to the commissions report. As part of the agreement approved Thursday, if the society commits another violation or fails to meet other conditions, it will trigger an additional $4,000 in fines.

The commission Thursday also fined the American Heart Association $400 for missing deadlines to report nearly $15,000 it spent pushing the smoking bans.

And it fined Breathe Easy Washington, the group that pushed last years failed smoking ban initiative, $400 for missing deadlines to report $8,500 in contributions it received last year.

ALBANY, N.Y. - Smoking rights' groups, tavern owners and libertarian political parties in nine states are calling for a boycott of donations to major charities, saying their support of smoking bans is a threat to small businesses and civil rights.

"No more," says Audrey Silk, founder of NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, which is leading what appears to be the first-ever boycott of the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association and American Heart Association.

"We will stop contributing to Big Nanny," she said. "Why do we want to donate to groups that are out to ruin our businesses and demean us as human beings?"

Smokers' and libertarian groups from Minnesota to Massachusetts are targeting the nonprofits for their political activities. The smokers' rights groups complain that the charities don't just support research and people afflicted with disease, but use their considerable lobbying power to help write smoking bans in states and municipalities.

Silk says her group gets no money from tobacco interests.

Silk targeted the American Cancer Society's radio and print advertising campaign in New Jersey, which calls on residents to urge their elected officials to pass an indoor smoking ban. Such bans hurt "mom-and-pop businesses and are intended to make pariahs out of adults engaging in a legal behavior," she said.

American Cancer Society national spokeswoman Colleen Wilber said she hasn't heard of such a boycott before. But she said the organization's lobbying efforts to support smoking bans to protect workers from secondhand smoke draw local opposition.

"We know people lose their lives to secondhand smoke and we see it as our obligation to protect those people from getting sick or dying," said Karen Becker, spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society of New York and New Jersey, which supports New Jersey's proposed indoor smoking ban.

The boycott effort is supported by Silk's CLASH, the national Smokers Club Inc., Illinois Smokers' Rights group, Indiana Amusement & Music Operators Association, the Kentucky Licensed Beverage Association, the Metro Louisville Hospitality Coalition, the Cambridge Citizens For Smokers' Rights in Massachusetts, the Smoke Out Gary group based in Minneapolis, Minnesotans Against Smoking Bans, the Fight City Hall group of Minnesota, Taverners United for Fairness New York, the American Arborist of New York, the Madison County Chapter of the Independence Party Ohio, the Lakewood Hospitality Association of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Smokers Action Network and Tennessee's Yes S.I.R. group.

The groups are urging members and sympathizers to continue to donate to charities with similar goals including the Make-A-Wish Foundation, Mary Crowley Medical Research Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the Shriners Hospital for Children as well as local medical charities.

What do these people want? The package to be black with a skull and bones on it with a label saying "Cancer"?

That wouldn't help...we'd still smoke 'em!! No, what they want is total backdoor prohibition. Next after bars and bowling alleys are parks and sidewalks...then your car...then your apartment...eventually your house. They want to make smoking illegal, by making it illegal to find a place to smoke. And they have a lot of $$ behind their efforts. Even before they've dispatched with smoking, they're already onto fast foods and "fat taxes". Have some fun and google Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, John Banzhaf, or Stan Glantz. Find out about the efforts behind these bans, and the plans to "sue" to enact neo-prohibitionist legislation. fun stuff.

That wouldn't help...we'd still smoke 'em!! No, what they want is total backdoor prohibition. Next after bars and bowling alleys are parks and sidewalks...then your car...then your apartment...eventually your house. They want to make smoking illegal, by making it illegal to find a place to smoke. And they have a lot of $$ behind their efforts. Even before they've dispatched with smoking, they're already onto fast foods and "fat taxes". Have some fun and google Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, John Banzhaf, or Stan Glantz. Find out about the efforts behind these bans, and the plans to "sue" to enact neo-prohibitionist legislation. fun stuff.

I'd LOVE for these groups to ban cigarette's outright across the United States. Can you imagine the "ripple effect" this would have? LOL!

13
posted on 06/14/2005 8:21:24 AM PDT
by SheLion
(Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)

It's too bad no one's focusing on the real scandal in this story: the fact that a private organization has to clear it with the government before launching any kind of message campaign, if it might somehow influence the outcome of legislation.

The total-staters have definitely figured out the best way to get conservatives on board with their agenda: Make liberals their first victims. They know how well it worked with Martha Stewart.

It's too bad no one's focusing on the real scandal in this story: the fact that a private organization has to clear it with the government before launching any kind of message campaign, if it might somehow influence the outcome of legislation.

The total-staters have definitely figured out the best way to get conservatives on board with their agenda: Make liberals their first victims. They know how well it worked with Martha Stewart.

Let me get another cup of coffee and try to figure out what you just wrote to me.

15
posted on 06/14/2005 8:25:16 AM PDT
by SheLion
(Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)

It's too bad no one's focusing on the real scandal in this story: the fact that a private organization has to clear it with the government before launching any kind of message campaign, if it might somehow influence the outcome of legislation.

NO that is not the scandal - the scandal here is that these are TAX-Exempt organizations and many receive taxpayer money government grants. The real scandal is they are permitted to spend ANY money forcing any kind of legislation.

You are correct. I was the director of candlelighters. Parents of children who have/had cancer in Humboldt County. It was like pulling teeth for the cancer society to assist us in anything. Go down to your local cancer society ane all you see is non smoking ads. They are obsessed with it. I knew this all along. all they spend their money on is administration and non smoking ads.

"It's too bad no one's focusing on the real scandal in this story: the fact that a private organization has to clear it with the government before launching any kind of message campaign, if it might somehow influence the outcome of legislation."

"We know people lose their lives to secondhand smoke and we see it as our obligation to protect those people from getting sick or dying," said Karen Becker, spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society of New York and New Jersey, which supports New Jersey's proposed indoor smoking ban.

Back in the late 70's my mother eventually died from bone cancer. While she was in her last year of life, my stepfather asked for assistance from the ACS due to the fact they could not afford the $300 per week chemo therapy she needed. They got no response but hey, thats the way it goes......

Just like all these other alleged do-good foundations, the folks at the top are rolling in dough while the folks the fund was intended to help are still dying and exhausting their life savings.........

In my opinion, the American Cancer Society is the most over rated non-profit org in existence today..........

Ok, 2nd comment was much better, but I doubt if it would stop the usual suspects, as they've got those millions they stole from the tobacco companies in the infamous settlement. Not quite sure if said monies would be effected, but they'll be able to find a way around it. And churches have been doing it for years.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.